Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

TDS & CR: Guys use the new thread already.

Posts

I don't even know who Diane Keaton is nor do I give a flip about her book, but that interview was hilarious.

Annie Hall. She was the title character and won Best Actress, plus three more nominations (Louise Bryant, Reds, 1975; Bessie Greenfield, Marvin's Room, 1996; Erica Barry, Something's Gotta Give, 2003). She was also in the Godfather trilogy as Kay Adams-Corleone.

I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.

Hookay, I can breath again after laughing so hard.
You could literally see the moment where Stephen went "Okay, where did I lose control of this interview?" in his mind. Then the realization that he never really had control of it in the first place.
Yeah, she had to be drunk for that interview. But good lord do I want her to be in that state and in an interview with John. It promises to be better that the Ricky Gervais interviews.

Comedy Central did not immediately return a request for comment, and Stewart has not addressed the threat on his Twitter account.

Is that a thing now? Have twitter responses become so ubiquitous that the absence of one has become newsworthy?

The Catholic League is a trashy concern group that uses its donations to pay the exorbitant six-figure salaries of its President, William Donohue, and VP, Bernadette Brady, who reported incomes in 2008 of $320,523 and $165,641, respectively. (link). The next year, Donohue paid himself a salary of 342,500 (an even 350,000 would have looked suspicious!) They have no other paid staff.

"They" (by which I mean Bill Donohue) have gotten in trouble in the past for lying on IRS forms, as well. So there's a pretty good chance that if he's claiming to the IRS that only 1/8th of their donations go to pay his salary, it may actually be more like 8/8ths. Just sayin! (link). The group, and by which I mean the man who runs it, has no credibility, no clout, no meaningful influence at all.

Any media figure can tell Donohue to go walk a plank of dicks and there is nothing he can do about it aside from embezzle donations with angry missives sent to local papers.

Pictured: Bill Donohue poses in a legitimate suit in front of some legitimate books, to emphasize that his group is a legitimate League of some sort and not just run by him, Bill Donohue, for the benefit of one Bill Donohue.

Comedy Central did not immediately return a request for comment, and Stewart has not addressed the threat on his Twitter account.

Is that a thing now? Have twitter responses become so ubiquitous that the absence of one has become newsworthy?

The Catholic League is a trashy concern group that uses its donations to pay the exorbitant six-figure salaries of its President, William Donohue, and VP, Bernadette Brady, who reported incomes in 2008 of $320,523 and $165,641, respectively. (link). The next year, Donohue paid himself a salary of 342,500 (an even 350,000 would have looked suspicious!) They have no other paid staff.

"They" (by which I mean Bill Donohue) have gotten in trouble in the past for lying on IRS forms, as well. So there's a pretty good chance that if he's claiming to the IRS that only 1/8th of their donations go to pay his salary, it may actually be more like 8/8ths. Just sayin! (link). The group, and by which I mean the man who runs it, has no credibility, no clout, no meaningful influence at all.

Any media figure can tell Donohue to go walk a plank of dicks and there is nothing he can do about it aside from embezzle donations with angry missives sent to local papers.

Pictured: Bill Donohue poses in a legitimate suit in front of some legitimate books, to emphasize that his group is a legitimate League of some sort and not just run by him, Bill Donohue, for the benefit of one Bill Donohue.

If I kill Bill Donohue, will I inherit the powers and money and prestige and money and clout and money of the Catholic League?

Yeah, Jon was trying to ease into a real discussion and that guy was bringing the crazy.

But he didn't question any of his completely fabricated claims or the fact that even taken at face value his position is a complete strawman.

Would the person who learned in school that the founders were atheist please stand up?

I really wish the Daily Show would also bring on someone who's an actual historian to offer a rebuttal, at the very least, but then again they have the "we're just a comedy show, why so serious" thing to hide behind when they give complete hacks like Barton a national platform multiple times and then do nothing but lob softballs at the guy.

Yeah, Jon was trying to ease into a real discussion and that guy was bringing the crazy.

But he didn't question any of his completely fabricated claims or the fact that even taken at face value his position is a complete strawman.

Would the person who learned in school that the founders were atheist please stand up?

I really wish the Daily Show would also bring on someone who's an actual historian to offer a rebuttal, at the very least, but then again they have the "we're just a comedy show, why so serious" thing to hide behind when they give complete hacks like Barton a national platform multiple times and then do nothing but lob softballs at the guy.

They do this occasionally. Like when Bush's Milk-Mustache Walrus lied his face off to Jon about Lincoln having some of his political rivals in his cabinet, Jon called Doris Kearns-Goodwin (holy shit I actually remembered her name on the first try), who wrote the book Team of Rivals, the next show to accuse her of lying about Lincoln, and Kearns-Goodwin explained the truth. Or when they recently had Tyson on to give his opinion about "asteroid mining: bullshit or no bullshit?" But they don't do it during an interview, because that would be confrontational and hostile and Jon wants to, y'know, have guests in the future. Guests he doesn't just automatically agree with.

Now if Jon knows his stuff, such as media hypocrisy, he's willing to go after someone like Jim Cramer because when it's something that's televised and he's trying to just pin the guy for lying, he can say "roll 212" and play a clip that counteracts what the guy just said, and it's all on him, not on a third-party expert he brings in. But why doesn't he put in the time and the effort and the research to do it himself all the time? Well, he does have a family, and he has to, y'know, eat, and sleep, and if you kill people on TV enough times they eventually arrest you. Also, he's a fucking comic, and the fact that we expect hard-hitting journalism from him is more a sign of how desperate we are for the Fourth Estate to do their job than of what his job actually entails.

Yeah, Jon was trying to ease into a real discussion and that guy was bringing the crazy.

But he didn't question any of his completely fabricated claims or the fact that even taken at face value his position is a complete strawman.

Would the person who learned in school that the founders were atheist please stand up?

I really wish the Daily Show would also bring on someone who's an actual historian to offer a rebuttal, at the very least, but then again they have the "we're just a comedy show, why so serious" thing to hide behind when they give complete hacks like Barton a national platform multiple times and then do nothing but lob softballs at the guy.

Yeah, Jon was trying to ease into a real discussion and that guy was bringing the crazy.

But he didn't question any of his completely fabricated claims or the fact that even taken at face value his position is a complete strawman.

Would the person who learned in school that the founders were atheist please stand up?

I really wish the Daily Show would also bring on someone who's an actual historian to offer a rebuttal, at the very least, but then again they have the "we're just a comedy show, why so serious" thing to hide behind when they give complete hacks like Barton a national platform multiple times and then do nothing but lob softballs at the guy.

I remember the last time he was on, Jon really did try to pin him a few times. It went something like this:

Yeah, Jon was trying to ease into a real discussion and that guy was bringing the crazy.

But he didn't question any of his completely fabricated claims or the fact that even taken at face value his position is a complete strawman.

Would the person who learned in school that the founders were atheist please stand up?

I really wish the Daily Show would also bring on someone who's an actual historian to offer a rebuttal, at the very least, but then again they have the "we're just a comedy show, why so serious" thing to hide behind when they give complete hacks like Barton a national platform multiple times and then do nothing but lob softballs at the guy.

I remember the last time he was on, Jon really did try to pin him a few times. It went something like this:

B: "Nope, didn't meant that at all. I actually meant almost the opposite."

J: "Oh...really?"

Repeat five or six times.

I think that is called "The huckabee."

Say crazy things on talk radio and then pretend like a sane person on tv.

I guess that is what really made me mad about the whole thing. Barton came out of the interview looking like a nice, religious person who was worried about his Christmas tree instead of a theocratic revisionist.

Yeah, Jon was trying to ease into a real discussion and that guy was bringing the crazy.

But he didn't question any of his completely fabricated claims or the fact that even taken at face value his position is a complete strawman.

Would the person who learned in school that the founders were atheist please stand up?

I really wish the Daily Show would also bring on someone who's an actual historian to offer a rebuttal, at the very least, but then again they have the "we're just a comedy show, why so serious" thing to hide behind when they give complete hacks like Barton a national platform multiple times and then do nothing but lob softballs at the guy.

I remember the last time he was on, Jon really did try to pin him a few times. It went something like this:

In interviews like that, it's so evident that Jon is just a really nice, decent guy who isn't looking for a fight. There were moments when it was clear that Jon was getting lost - getting genuinely uncertain what the two of them were even talking about anymore, and with different personalities, especially on cable, that's the sort of conversation that would easily end in some sort of confrontation, whereas Jon preferred to take a much more civil, circuitous route around his confusion. It's one thing when you can have a reasonable debate that ends in two people simply not agreeing, and it's another much more infuriating thing when one party steadfastly rejects the premise that the two are even having the same discussion.

Hard to be wrong when you're never actually discussing any one thing, ever.

The issue isn't that they're hiding behind the fact that they're "a comedy show," they just really are a comedy show. Also, besides the negative impacts on future interview prospects, inviting someone to your show so you can humiliate them in front of your audience is something assholes do. I think if Stewart really is serious about any message on the show, it's that antagonizing people and making politics a personal fight is part of the problem. If everyone was a civil as Stewart, he wouldn't have shit to talk about.

‮Marty: The future, it's where you're going?Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.

‮Marty: The future, it's where you're going?Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.

The other thing is that Barton isn't just some historian that has a conservative take on American history that deserves a respectful interview on a late night comedy show. He's actually not a historian, and has been busted multiple times for making up fake quotes to buttress his far-right Dominionist view of American history. It's like inviting the Timecube dude on and treating him like a serious scientist.

He seems entirely too reasonable for this batch of Republicans. I mean sure I still think he's wrong about priorities, but he reminds me of Republicans back in the 90's when they used to talk to democrats and meet in the middle on issues

He seems entirely too reasonable for this batch of Republicans. I mean sure I still think he's wrong about priorities, but he reminds me of Republicans back in the 90's when they used to talk to democrats and meet in the middle on issues

Now normally, when Coburn cockblocks legislation, he doesn't care who knows about it. In fact right now, Senator Coburn has public holds on endangered animal protection legislation, food safety legislation, paying court-ordered settlements to African-American farmers, and allowing a private group to build a National Women's Museum, because Coburn felt women's issues were already covered by institutions like the Quilters Hall of Fame, a Cowgirl Museum, and the Hulda Klager Lilac Gardens.

Also holds on Haiti relief.

And closest to Jon's heart. Coburn blocked the health care for 9/11 first responders bill because he claimed it never went through committee. Which he would know, as it was his committee! Yeah, it happened, he just didn't bother to show up.

enlightenedbum on May 2012

Never use the phrase "alt right." Call them what they are: white supremacists.